The classic Hollywood studio system was quite different from what we now think of as film production. This is mainly due to the use of vertical integration in the studio system, but what I found summed it up the best was the lecturer stating that "Hollywood production companies thought of the film industry the same as Ford thought about automobiles". The studios would just get whoever they had on contract to fill all of the parts needed for a film to be made, and from that the golden era of cinema was born. What I find as the most interesting aspect of this is how little the directors of the films seemed to be at this time. When the lecturer was talking about how although we think of Casablanca and The Wizard of Oz as some of the greatest films of all time, nobody ever seems to know who directed it or what any of those directors did other than those hits. That is much different nowadays, because now people can spurt off what films Darren Aronofsky, Steven Spielberg, or Roman Planski has directed and how influential they are due to their inputs, but during the golden age the director was just another spot to fill in the assembly line of the movie making process.
Because the public didn't seem to care about who directed what, it was the use of the Hollywood movie stars that brought in the money. These stars were directly related to their production companies, having contracts with them that could last for most of their life. People during that time were able to recognize what film studio put out what film based on the actors, and could assume who would be in the studio's next production. It is interesting to compare this to modern cinema, because really now the actors seemed to be more linked to certain people in the production process rater than production companies themselves. For instance, if you see a trailer for a film starring Seth Rogen and Jason Segel, you can make an assumption that Judd Apatow has something to do with this movie; either writing, directing, or producing it. Another example is that if you are watching a film directed by Chris Nolan, you can already guess that Michael Caine is going to show up and some point in the movie. Certain stars and directors are friends or just work well together, which seems to influence modern cinema more than the link between stars and production companies.
This use of the assembly line film-making rather than the tedious ways of doing it now was definitely a way to spurt out more films at a quicker pace and have their stars on screen constantly, which in turn to the companies meant money. This influenced what kinds of films the studios made because they would make whatever film would showcase their star the best, and would be able to "own" specific genres over other companies because their stars they had would become the face of westerns, musicals, crime films, and so on. If someone were to see a film coming out with Humphrey Bogart they could automatically assume that it would be a crime film, and that Warner Bros. would be behind it. A modern equivalence of this would be if someone saw a trailer for a film with huge explosions, young "hot" actors, and fighting airplanes, they could assume that Michael Bay was behind it. What seems to have happened over the course of half a century is that rather that the production companies themselves being who took control of certain genres and actors, it is now more of directors and others in the production process that control the genres and actors.
Because the public didn't seem to care about who directed what, it was the use of the Hollywood movie stars that brought in the money. These stars were directly related to their production companies, having contracts with them that could last for most of their life. People during that time were able to recognize what film studio put out what film based on the actors, and could assume who would be in the studio's next production. It is interesting to compare this to modern cinema, because really now the actors seemed to be more linked to certain people in the production process rater than production companies themselves. For instance, if you see a trailer for a film starring Seth Rogen and Jason Segel, you can make an assumption that Judd Apatow has something to do with this movie; either writing, directing, or producing it. Another example is that if you are watching a film directed by Chris Nolan, you can already guess that Michael Caine is going to show up and some point in the movie. Certain stars and directors are friends or just work well together, which seems to influence modern cinema more than the link between stars and production companies.
This use of the assembly line film-making rather than the tedious ways of doing it now was definitely a way to spurt out more films at a quicker pace and have their stars on screen constantly, which in turn to the companies meant money. This influenced what kinds of films the studios made because they would make whatever film would showcase their star the best, and would be able to "own" specific genres over other companies because their stars they had would become the face of westerns, musicals, crime films, and so on. If someone were to see a film coming out with Humphrey Bogart they could automatically assume that it would be a crime film, and that Warner Bros. would be behind it. A modern equivalence of this would be if someone saw a trailer for a film with huge explosions, young "hot" actors, and fighting airplanes, they could assume that Michael Bay was behind it. What seems to have happened over the course of half a century is that rather that the production companies themselves being who took control of certain genres and actors, it is now more of directors and others in the production process that control the genres and actors.
No comments:
Post a Comment